This chapter provides a brief overview American public housing history, linked to the broader planning history of slum clearance and urban renewal. It steps back to consider the longer history of ...
More

This chapter provides a brief overview American public housing history, linked to the broader planning history of slum clearance and urban renewal. It steps back to consider the longer history of efforts to define the problem of poverty and its governance. It then traces the evolution of deeply subsidized housing programs, revealing decades of expansion, followed by a more recent contraction. It next introduces HOPE VI, the main federal program of public housing redevelopment, explaining its policy evolution, efforts to combat concentrated poverty, and links to gentrification. It provides a method for categorizing the significant variety of efforts to implement HOPE VI projects, showing that mixed-income housing can be pursued in many different ways, in accordance with divergent aims. By identifying the larger national pattern of HOPE VI deployment in an unprecedented way, it situates the book’s four detailed case examinations in a more holistic context.Less

Public Housing, Redevelopment, and the Governance of Poverty

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

This chapter provides a brief overview American public housing history, linked to the broader planning history of slum clearance and urban renewal. It steps back to consider the longer history of efforts to define the problem of poverty and its governance. It then traces the evolution of deeply subsidized housing programs, revealing decades of expansion, followed by a more recent contraction. It next introduces HOPE VI, the main federal program of public housing redevelopment, explaining its policy evolution, efforts to combat concentrated poverty, and links to gentrification. It provides a method for categorizing the significant variety of efforts to implement HOPE VI projects, showing that mixed-income housing can be pursued in many different ways, in accordance with divergent aims. By identifying the larger national pattern of HOPE VI deployment in an unprecedented way, it situates the book’s four detailed case examinations in a more holistic context.

HOPE VI stands for Home ownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere, and this chapter looks at the HOPE VI mixed-income projects in US cities, especially Nashville, Tennessee. It calls for ...
More

HOPE VI stands for Home ownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere, and this chapter looks at the HOPE VI mixed-income projects in US cities, especially Nashville, Tennessee. It calls for modesty in its claims.Less

HOPE VI: calling for modesty in its claims

James FraserJames DefilippisJoshua Bazuin

Published in print: 2011-10-19

HOPE VI stands for Home ownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere, and this chapter looks at the HOPE VI mixed-income projects in US cities, especially Nashville, Tennessee. It calls for modesty in its claims.

This chapter places public housing reform policies like the Plan for Transformation in Chicago and HOPE VI (and its successor Choice Neighborhoods) at the national level in the broader historical ...
More

This chapter places public housing reform policies like the Plan for Transformation in Chicago and HOPE VI (and its successor Choice Neighborhoods) at the national level in the broader historical context of community development and “community building” efforts in the United States. It then builds on this broader history to situate housing policy as a response to urban poverty, charting the development of public housing in the United States, providing a description and analysis of current policy that seeks to reform it, and laying out the parameters and components of the Transformation that frame action and impact at the local level in each mixed-income development replacing public housing complexes.Less

Mixed-Income Development in Context : Urban Poverty, Community Development, and the Transformation of Public Housing

Robert J. ChaskinMark L. Joseph

Published in print: 2015-11-16

This chapter places public housing reform policies like the Plan for Transformation in Chicago and HOPE VI (and its successor Choice Neighborhoods) at the national level in the broader historical context of community development and “community building” efforts in the United States. It then builds on this broader history to situate housing policy as a response to urban poverty, charting the development of public housing in the United States, providing a description and analysis of current policy that seeks to reform it, and laying out the parameters and components of the Transformation that frame action and impact at the local level in each mixed-income development replacing public housing complexes.

Chapter 11 charts North Beach Place’s decade-long struggle from initial HOPE VI proposal (1995) to completed development (2005). Unlike Tucson, where the public sector held sway, San Francisco had a ...
More

Chapter 11 charts North Beach Place’s decade-long struggle from initial HOPE VI proposal (1995) to completed development (2005). Unlike Tucson, where the public sector held sway, San Francisco had a weak housing authority; unlike Boston, no single tenant emerged as a Plebs pole star; and unlike New Orleans, San Franciscans refused to leave the fate of public housing to the unchecked preferences of for-profit developers. Instead, buoyed by support from the Telegraph Hill Neighborhood Center and the Chinatown Community Development Center, proponents of the North Beach Place redevelopment insisted on retaining all 229 deeply subsidized apartments, while densifying the site to include an additional 112 units of affordable housing, financed with Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. With strong mayoral support, leadership from a not-for-profit developer, and empowered tenants, this version of HOPE VI preserved and enhanced the last remnants of affordable housing in an otherwise gentrifying neighborhood.Less

Renewing North Beach Place

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

Chapter 11 charts North Beach Place’s decade-long struggle from initial HOPE VI proposal (1995) to completed development (2005). Unlike Tucson, where the public sector held sway, San Francisco had a weak housing authority; unlike Boston, no single tenant emerged as a Plebs pole star; and unlike New Orleans, San Franciscans refused to leave the fate of public housing to the unchecked preferences of for-profit developers. Instead, buoyed by support from the Telegraph Hill Neighborhood Center and the Chinatown Community Development Center, proponents of the North Beach Place redevelopment insisted on retaining all 229 deeply subsidized apartments, while densifying the site to include an additional 112 units of affordable housing, financed with Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. With strong mayoral support, leadership from a not-for-profit developer, and empowered tenants, this version of HOPE VI preserved and enhanced the last remnants of affordable housing in an otherwise gentrifying neighborhood.

Chapter 13 revisits the four constellations—Publica Major, the Big Developer, Nonprofitus, and Plebs—to compare the four places discussed in the book. These cities of stars reveal how HOPE VI affects ...
More

Chapter 13 revisits the four constellations—Publica Major, the Big Developer, Nonprofitus, and Plebs—to compare the four places discussed in the book. These cities of stars reveal how HOPE VI affects governance in two settings: the phased implementation of projects and the management of completed neighborhoods. The relative power of public, private, not-for-profit, and community voices constrains project pace and shapes how much to prioritize on-site rehousing of the existing extremely low-income community. And, following on this, the second key arena of poverty governance entails decisions about selecting and managing residents in the completed development. Reflecting on the lived reality of the four communities provides an opportunity to revisit the stated rationales for income mixing. The chapter assesses the difficulties of redeveloping public housing in the context of ongoing (self-inflicted) economic austerity and lingering resentments and concludes by examining emergent directions for housing and planning policy.Less

Housing the Poorest: Hoping for More

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

Chapter 13 revisits the four constellations—Publica Major, the Big Developer, Nonprofitus, and Plebs—to compare the four places discussed in the book. These cities of stars reveal how HOPE VI affects governance in two settings: the phased implementation of projects and the management of completed neighborhoods. The relative power of public, private, not-for-profit, and community voices constrains project pace and shapes how much to prioritize on-site rehousing of the existing extremely low-income community. And, following on this, the second key arena of poverty governance entails decisions about selecting and managing residents in the completed development. Reflecting on the lived reality of the four communities provides an opportunity to revisit the stated rationales for income mixing. The chapter assesses the difficulties of redeveloping public housing in the context of ongoing (self-inflicted) economic austerity and lingering resentments and concludes by examining emergent directions for housing and planning policy.

This chapter explores the several factors that played a part in the transformation of Atlanta’s Techwood and Clark Howell developments from bold experiments at selective collectives for the upwardly ...
More

This chapter explores the several factors that played a part in the transformation of Atlanta’s Techwood and Clark Howell developments from bold experiments at selective collectives for the upwardly mobile white poor into a concentrated area of deeply impoverished black households. Changes in policy was one of these factors, as small adjustments—like elimination of screening for potential residents and income requirements—can drastically influence the tenant population. The absence of any effective social programs to help the tenants and the deterioration of maintenance of properties also contributed to the steady decline of Techwood and Clark Howell. In the 1990s, Atlanta supported the call for the bold redevelopment opportunities provided by the Olympics, which the city hosted in 1996. In order to garner more global visibility, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in cooperation with HOPE VI and Congress, ruled to make the federal housing policy friendlier to private sector initiatives.Less

Redeveloping Techwood and Clark Howell : the Purges of Progress

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2013-04-15

This chapter explores the several factors that played a part in the transformation of Atlanta’s Techwood and Clark Howell developments from bold experiments at selective collectives for the upwardly mobile white poor into a concentrated area of deeply impoverished black households. Changes in policy was one of these factors, as small adjustments—like elimination of screening for potential residents and income requirements—can drastically influence the tenant population. The absence of any effective social programs to help the tenants and the deterioration of maintenance of properties also contributed to the steady decline of Techwood and Clark Howell. In the 1990s, Atlanta supported the call for the bold redevelopment opportunities provided by the Olympics, which the city hosted in 1996. In order to garner more global visibility, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), in cooperation with HOPE VI and Congress, ruled to make the federal housing policy friendlier to private sector initiatives.

Chapter 2 traces the changing nature of urban governance and participation between the 1940s and the present. It argues that much of HOPE VI variation is rooted in a city’s experience with earlier ...
More

Chapter 2 traces the changing nature of urban governance and participation between the 1940s and the present. It argues that much of HOPE VI variation is rooted in a city’s experience with earlier efforts at slum clearance, urban renewal, and central-city highways. In those cities where past backlashes against perceived excesses in land taking and displacement in residential areas led to lasting citywide movements to prevent this from happening again, there seems to be much greater protection for the poorest citizens under HOPE VI. Instead of more narrowly constructed urban regimes or growth machines focused in public-private partnerships, broader coalitions develop. Using the metaphor of constellations, the chapter identifies four types of poverty governance: the Big Developer, Publica Major, Nonprofitus, and Plebs. Each of these encompasses diverse players in development initiatives, but corresponds, respectively, to a polestar located in the private sector, public sector, not-for-profit sector, or community sector.Less

After Urban Renewal : Building Governance Constellations

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

Chapter 2 traces the changing nature of urban governance and participation between the 1940s and the present. It argues that much of HOPE VI variation is rooted in a city’s experience with earlier efforts at slum clearance, urban renewal, and central-city highways. In those cities where past backlashes against perceived excesses in land taking and displacement in residential areas led to lasting citywide movements to prevent this from happening again, there seems to be much greater protection for the poorest citizens under HOPE VI. Instead of more narrowly constructed urban regimes or growth machines focused in public-private partnerships, broader coalitions develop. Using the metaphor of constellations, the chapter identifies four types of poverty governance: the Big Developer, Publica Major, Nonprofitus, and Plebs. Each of these encompasses diverse players in development initiatives, but corresponds, respectively, to a polestar located in the private sector, public sector, not-for-profit sector, or community sector.

Chapter 4 follows the tortuous course that led St. Thomas to its redevelopment, revealing the machinations of a governance constellation centered on the prerogatives of the Big Developer. Starting in ...
More

Chapter 4 follows the tortuous course that led St. Thomas to its redevelopment, revealing the machinations of a governance constellation centered on the prerogatives of the Big Developer. Starting in the late 1980s, the struggling housing project had multiple suitors eager to launch a transformation. The redevelopment effort faced a long series of false starts and endured multiple lawsuits and setbacks. Eventually, championed by maverick developer Pres Kabacoff, this yielded the mixed-income community of River Garden, completed in phases between 2001 and 2009. Although the initial HOPE VI application had proposed a majority of low-income housing on the site, subsequent proposals shifted to plans emphasizing market-rate and tax-credit housing plus a Walmart supercenter, with additional scattered-site public housing for large families promised but never constructed. Eventually, however, market conditions soured and the actual development that got built has far less market-rate housing than this midcourse correction had sought to deliver.Less

The Tortuous Road from St. Thomas to River Garden

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

Chapter 4 follows the tortuous course that led St. Thomas to its redevelopment, revealing the machinations of a governance constellation centered on the prerogatives of the Big Developer. Starting in the late 1980s, the struggling housing project had multiple suitors eager to launch a transformation. The redevelopment effort faced a long series of false starts and endured multiple lawsuits and setbacks. Eventually, championed by maverick developer Pres Kabacoff, this yielded the mixed-income community of River Garden, completed in phases between 2001 and 2009. Although the initial HOPE VI application had proposed a majority of low-income housing on the site, subsequent proposals shifted to plans emphasizing market-rate and tax-credit housing plus a Walmart supercenter, with additional scattered-site public housing for large families promised but never constructed. Eventually, however, market conditions soured and the actual development that got built has far less market-rate housing than this midcourse correction had sought to deliver.

Chapter 9 chronicles the demise of Tucson’s Connie Chambers project during the 1980s and its replacement by Posadas Sentinel. The city’s Community Services Department (CSD) used HOPE VI to redevelop ...
More

Chapter 9 chronicles the demise of Tucson’s Connie Chambers project during the 1980s and its replacement by Posadas Sentinel. The city’s Community Services Department (CSD) used HOPE VI to redevelop the property as Posadas Sentinel, part of a wider revitalization effort in the surrounding barrio. Acutely conscious of neighborhood critics who feared further insensitive urban renewal, the city assiduously worked to maximize housing opportunities for residents of Connie Chambers. As with Orchard Gardens but unlike River Garden, Tucson’s city leaders premised the redevelopment on occupancy by very low-income households, while seeking other ways to diversify range of incomes. The CSD replaced all two hundred public housing units but, rather than put these all back into the original barrio site, took advantage of the city’s peculiar housing market and scattered much of the housing across the city by purchasing homes in a variety of new or vacant subdivisions.Less

The Fall of Connie Chambers and the Rise of Posadas Sentinel

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

Chapter 9 chronicles the demise of Tucson’s Connie Chambers project during the 1980s and its replacement by Posadas Sentinel. The city’s Community Services Department (CSD) used HOPE VI to redevelop the property as Posadas Sentinel, part of a wider revitalization effort in the surrounding barrio. Acutely conscious of neighborhood critics who feared further insensitive urban renewal, the city assiduously worked to maximize housing opportunities for residents of Connie Chambers. As with Orchard Gardens but unlike River Garden, Tucson’s city leaders premised the redevelopment on occupancy by very low-income households, while seeking other ways to diversify range of incomes. The CSD replaced all two hundred public housing units but, rather than put these all back into the original barrio site, took advantage of the city’s peculiar housing market and scattered much of the housing across the city by purchasing homes in a variety of new or vacant subdivisions.

Chapter 7 describes the harrowing decline of Orchard Park during the late 1980s and early 1990s and then traces the resident-centered successful effort to transform Orchard Park into Orchard Gardens ...
More

Chapter 7 describes the harrowing decline of Orchard Park during the late 1980s and early 1990s and then traces the resident-centered successful effort to transform Orchard Park into Orchard Gardens using the HOPE VI program. When HOPE VI funds became available in the 1990s, activist Boston citizens—prominently including Orchard Park Tenants Association chairwoman Edna Bynoe—had every reason to assume that public housing transformation would overwhelmingly serve those with the lowest incomes. HOPE VI, Boston-style, was co-led by a neighborhood-based not-for-profit developer and featured prominent resident input. Orchard Gardens allocated 85 percent of dwellings to public housing residents, while enabling 70 percent of former Orchard Park households to return. The new community, under well-regarded private management, also positively impacted the surrounding neighborhood by providing infill housing, as well as community facilities, including a new school. Boston continued to emphasize housing for very low-income households in subsequent HOPE VI initiatives.Less

The Fall of Orchard Park, the Rise of Orchard Gardens

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

Chapter 7 describes the harrowing decline of Orchard Park during the late 1980s and early 1990s and then traces the resident-centered successful effort to transform Orchard Park into Orchard Gardens using the HOPE VI program. When HOPE VI funds became available in the 1990s, activist Boston citizens—prominently including Orchard Park Tenants Association chairwoman Edna Bynoe—had every reason to assume that public housing transformation would overwhelmingly serve those with the lowest incomes. HOPE VI, Boston-style, was co-led by a neighborhood-based not-for-profit developer and featured prominent resident input. Orchard Gardens allocated 85 percent of dwellings to public housing residents, while enabling 70 percent of former Orchard Park households to return. The new community, under well-regarded private management, also positively impacted the surrounding neighborhood by providing infill housing, as well as community facilities, including a new school. Boston continued to emphasize housing for very low-income households in subsequent HOPE VI initiatives.

This chapter discusses the redevelopment efforts being made in the Cabrini-Green neighborhood. The birth of the HOPE VI program became a turning point in Cabrini-Green’s fate. It became a symbol ...
More

This chapter discusses the redevelopment efforts being made in the Cabrini-Green neighborhood. The birth of the HOPE VI program became a turning point in Cabrini-Green’s fate. It became a symbol among housing projects as “all that is wrong about public housing.” To save Cabrini-Green, a change in both physical and social aspects must be made. The Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) worked closely with residents and initiated the redevelopment in Cabrini-Green’s northern extension. This move required the demolition of 660 apartments to make way for 493 new units. The plan encountered several redevelopment problems which led to its slowing down in the 1990s. The redevelopment of Cabrini-Green’s center began in 2000, as the Working Group initiated the reboot of HOPE VI redevelopment processes on Cabrini-Green’s North side.Less

Bringing the Gold Coast to the Slum : Cabrini-Green’s Redevelopment and the Litigation of Inclusion

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2013-04-15

This chapter discusses the redevelopment efforts being made in the Cabrini-Green neighborhood. The birth of the HOPE VI program became a turning point in Cabrini-Green’s fate. It became a symbol among housing projects as “all that is wrong about public housing.” To save Cabrini-Green, a change in both physical and social aspects must be made. The Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) worked closely with residents and initiated the redevelopment in Cabrini-Green’s northern extension. This move required the demolition of 660 apartments to make way for 493 new units. The plan encountered several redevelopment problems which led to its slowing down in the 1990s. The redevelopment of Cabrini-Green’s center began in 2000, as the Working Group initiated the reboot of HOPE VI redevelopment processes on Cabrini-Green’s North side.

Chapter 12 investigates the post–HOPE VI version of North Beach Place, while discussing how San Francisco’s leaders sought to make this a model for public housing transformation citywide. In addition ...
More

Chapter 12 investigates the post–HOPE VI version of North Beach Place, while discussing how San Francisco’s leaders sought to make this a model for public housing transformation citywide. In addition to increasing the number of on-site affordable housing units, the new North Beach Place added a supermarket, substantial below-grade parking, and new street-level retail. At the same time, however, the struggle to rehouse former residents proved contentious and protracted. Ultimately, only 36 percent of the original households chose (or were able) to return to the new development. Most of the initial tenant leaders did not come back, and many current residents—while grateful for their housing—lament the strictures of life under the close surveillance of private management. The chapter concludes with discussion of San Francisco’s HOPE SF initiative, a post–HOPE VI effort to use the North Beach Place experience to implement mixed-income housing elsewhere in the city.Less

Life at North Beach Place : A Model for Other Places?

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

Chapter 12 investigates the post–HOPE VI version of North Beach Place, while discussing how San Francisco’s leaders sought to make this a model for public housing transformation citywide. In addition to increasing the number of on-site affordable housing units, the new North Beach Place added a supermarket, substantial below-grade parking, and new street-level retail. At the same time, however, the struggle to rehouse former residents proved contentious and protracted. Ultimately, only 36 percent of the original households chose (or were able) to return to the new development. Most of the initial tenant leaders did not come back, and many current residents—while grateful for their housing—lament the strictures of life under the close surveillance of private management. The chapter concludes with discussion of San Francisco’s HOPE SF initiative, a post–HOPE VI effort to use the North Beach Place experience to implement mixed-income housing elsewhere in the city.

This chapter examines the achievements and limitations of mixed-income development as a desegregation strategy. Mixed-income development has proven to be an effective way to harness private-sector ...
More

This chapter examines the achievements and limitations of mixed-income development as a desegregation strategy. Mixed-income development has proven to be an effective way to harness private-sector interest in urban revitalization in order to generate the production of high-quality affordable housing. Beyond the goals of physical redevelopment and residential integration, there is evidence that mixed-income approaches promote stable, safe communities. After 20 years of the HOPE VI initiative, the federal government sought to enhance the mixed-income approach by launching Choice Neighborhoods in 2010. Significant questions remain about how to increase the benefits to low-income households through this approach and how to avoid reinforcing stigma and marginalization within the new developments. After briefly reviewing the history of mixed-income housing and the theoretical propositions underlying it, this chapter reviews the evidence of its benefits and shortcomings as a desegregation approach and proposes an array of strategies for strengthening the approach.Less

Promoting Poverty Deconcentration and Racial Desegregation through Mixed-Income Development

Mark L. Joseph

Published in print: 2019-01-03

This chapter examines the achievements and limitations of mixed-income development as a desegregation strategy. Mixed-income development has proven to be an effective way to harness private-sector interest in urban revitalization in order to generate the production of high-quality affordable housing. Beyond the goals of physical redevelopment and residential integration, there is evidence that mixed-income approaches promote stable, safe communities. After 20 years of the HOPE VI initiative, the federal government sought to enhance the mixed-income approach by launching Choice Neighborhoods in 2010. Significant questions remain about how to increase the benefits to low-income households through this approach and how to avoid reinforcing stigma and marginalization within the new developments. After briefly reviewing the history of mixed-income housing and the theoretical propositions underlying it, this chapter reviews the evidence of its benefits and shortcomings as a desegregation approach and proposes an array of strategies for strengthening the approach.

This chapter provides an overview of the main themes covered in the present volume. Public housing is a federal program started by the US Housing Act of 1937, which provided public financing for ...
More

This chapter provides an overview of the main themes covered in the present volume. Public housing is a federal program started by the US Housing Act of 1937, which provided public financing for low-cost public housing. Initially, public housing was developed to meet the housing needs of white middle-class families affected by the Great Depression; however, it quickly transitioned into housing for poor racial minorities. Shortly after its inception, public housing captured national attention due to the constellation of social problems that coalesced in many public housing developments across the country. In an attempt to rectify what was deemed a failed housing policy, the United States launched the Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere VI (HOPE VI) program to transform (i.e. demolish and rebuild) distressed public housing developments in many large US cities. This book seeks to contribute to knowledge on African American youth living in public housing developments that were not targeted by HOPE VI. The remainder of the chapter discusses public housing residents and locations; changes in urban public housing; why and how public housing developments are neighborhoods in their own right; research on youth public housing; and limitations on public housing.Less

Introduction : Context Matters

Von E. Nebbitt

Published in print: 2015-06-09

This chapter provides an overview of the main themes covered in the present volume. Public housing is a federal program started by the US Housing Act of 1937, which provided public financing for low-cost public housing. Initially, public housing was developed to meet the housing needs of white middle-class families affected by the Great Depression; however, it quickly transitioned into housing for poor racial minorities. Shortly after its inception, public housing captured national attention due to the constellation of social problems that coalesced in many public housing developments across the country. In an attempt to rectify what was deemed a failed housing policy, the United States launched the Housing Opportunities for People Everywhere VI (HOPE VI) program to transform (i.e. demolish and rebuild) distressed public housing developments in many large US cities. This book seeks to contribute to knowledge on African American youth living in public housing developments that were not targeted by HOPE VI. The remainder of the chapter discusses public housing residents and locations; changes in urban public housing; why and how public housing developments are neighborhoods in their own right; research on youth public housing; and limitations on public housing.

This chapter contains the argument that fair housing advocates have adopted a spatial strategy of advocacy that has increasingly brought it into conflict with community development efforts. This ...
More

This chapter contains the argument that fair housing advocates have adopted a spatial strategy of advocacy that has increasingly brought it into conflict with community development efforts. This chapter covers the period of time from passage of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 to the turn of the century. It highlights the key judicial decisions and public policies reflecting the debate between integration and community development. Initially the fair housing movement was most concerned with opening up exclusionary communities. From this position, the movement evolved to include efforts to limit affordable housing in communities of color to avoid the perpetuation of segregation. Finally, the movement has embraced efforts to demolish existing concentrations of low-cost housing as a means of breaking up communities of color. The evolution of the fair housing movement has, with each step, accentuated its conflicts with the community development movement.Less

The Three Stations of Fair Housing Spatial Strategy

Edward G. Goetz

Published in print: 2018-03-15

This chapter contains the argument that fair housing advocates have adopted a spatial strategy of advocacy that has increasingly brought it into conflict with community development efforts. This chapter covers the period of time from passage of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 to the turn of the century. It highlights the key judicial decisions and public policies reflecting the debate between integration and community development. Initially the fair housing movement was most concerned with opening up exclusionary communities. From this position, the movement evolved to include efforts to limit affordable housing in communities of color to avoid the perpetuation of segregation. Finally, the movement has embraced efforts to demolish existing concentrations of low-cost housing as a means of breaking up communities of color. The evolution of the fair housing movement has, with each step, accentuated its conflicts with the community development movement.

At a time when lower-income Americans face a desperate struggle to find affordable rental housing in many cities, After the Projects investigates the contested spatial politics of public housing ...
More

At a time when lower-income Americans face a desperate struggle to find affordable rental housing in many cities, After the Projects investigates the contested spatial politics of public housing development and redevelopment. Public housing practices differ markedly from city to city and, collectively, reveal deeply held American attitudes about poverty and how the poorest should be governed. The book exposes the range of outcomes from the US federal government’s HOPE VI program for public housing transformation, focused on nuanced accounts of four very different ways of implementing this same national initiative—in Boston, New Orleans, Tucson, and San Francisco. It draws upon more than two hundred interviews, analysis of internal documents about each project, and nearly fifteen years of visits to these neighborhoods. The central aim is to understand how and why some cities, when redeveloping public housing, have attempted to minimize the presence of the poorest residents in their new mixed-income communities, while other cities have instead tried to serve the maximum number of extremely low-income households. The book shows that these socially and politically revealing decisions are rooted in distinctly different kinds of governance constellations—each yielding quite different sorts of community pressures. These have been forged over many decades in response to each city’s own struggle with previous efforts at urban renewal. In contrast to other books that have focused on housing in a single city, this volume offers comparative analysis and a national picture, while also discussing four emblematic communities with an unprecedented level of detail.Less

After the Projects : Public Housing Redevelopment and the Governance of the Poorest Americans

Lawrence J. Vale

Published in print: 2018-12-27

At a time when lower-income Americans face a desperate struggle to find affordable rental housing in many cities, After the Projects investigates the contested spatial politics of public housing development and redevelopment. Public housing practices differ markedly from city to city and, collectively, reveal deeply held American attitudes about poverty and how the poorest should be governed. The book exposes the range of outcomes from the US federal government’s HOPE VI program for public housing transformation, focused on nuanced accounts of four very different ways of implementing this same national initiative—in Boston, New Orleans, Tucson, and San Francisco. It draws upon more than two hundred interviews, analysis of internal documents about each project, and nearly fifteen years of visits to these neighborhoods. The central aim is to understand how and why some cities, when redeveloping public housing, have attempted to minimize the presence of the poorest residents in their new mixed-income communities, while other cities have instead tried to serve the maximum number of extremely low-income households. The book shows that these socially and politically revealing decisions are rooted in distinctly different kinds of governance constellations—each yielding quite different sorts of community pressures. These have been forged over many decades in response to each city’s own struggle with previous efforts at urban renewal. In contrast to other books that have focused on housing in a single city, this volume offers comparative analysis and a national picture, while also discussing four emblematic communities with an unprecedented level of detail.

Chapter 4 begins by cataloguing the reasons many offered for celebrating the United Center as a new breed of large-scale urban redevelopment project. First, it injected much needed private funds for ...
More

Chapter 4 begins by cataloguing the reasons many offered for celebrating the United Center as a new breed of large-scale urban redevelopment project. First, it injected much needed private funds for allegedly "balanced" (i.e., equitable for longtime, low-income residents) redevelopment directly into West Haven through the community benefits agreement. Second, it helped "leverage" additional public investment in the neighborhood. Finally, the new arena rehabilitated the neighborhood's reputation in ways that would attract additional private investment. This assessment overlooked serious problems. Many of the "community benefits" theoretically accessible to longtime residents (e.g., a new library) ended up negated by the fact that most of the philanthropic investments by arena ownership went towards expanding homeownership among market-rate buyers from outside West Haven. Census and home lending data indicate that this strategy failed to stymie, and probably accelerated, the displacement of low-income blacks. Moreover, the design of the arena, particularly the surface parking lots surrounding it, precluded sustained economic development that could have brought year-round job opportunities for underemployed residents. Available evidence also demonstrates that new private/public investment was headed for West Haven even without a new arena, as development had been creeping towards the neighborhood from downtown since the early 1980s.Less

Anchor or Shipwreck? The United Center and Economic Development in West Haven

Sean Dinces

Published in print: 2018-11-05

Chapter 4 begins by cataloguing the reasons many offered for celebrating the United Center as a new breed of large-scale urban redevelopment project. First, it injected much needed private funds for allegedly "balanced" (i.e., equitable for longtime, low-income residents) redevelopment directly into West Haven through the community benefits agreement. Second, it helped "leverage" additional public investment in the neighborhood. Finally, the new arena rehabilitated the neighborhood's reputation in ways that would attract additional private investment. This assessment overlooked serious problems. Many of the "community benefits" theoretically accessible to longtime residents (e.g., a new library) ended up negated by the fact that most of the philanthropic investments by arena ownership went towards expanding homeownership among market-rate buyers from outside West Haven. Census and home lending data indicate that this strategy failed to stymie, and probably accelerated, the displacement of low-income blacks. Moreover, the design of the arena, particularly the surface parking lots surrounding it, precluded sustained economic development that could have brought year-round job opportunities for underemployed residents. Available evidence also demonstrates that new private/public investment was headed for West Haven even without a new arena, as development had been creeping towards the neighborhood from downtown since the early 1980s.

Between 1970 and 1974, tenants in the massive Stella Wright Homes led the longest rent strike in the history of U.S. public housing. The quality of Newark’s public housing had eroded alarmingly since ...
More

Between 1970 and 1974, tenants in the massive Stella Wright Homes led the longest rent strike in the history of U.S. public housing. The quality of Newark’s public housing had eroded alarmingly since its celebrated opening in the 1940s. Poor residents had been funneled into isolated and increasingly decrepit buildings. The tenants’ campaign recaptures a missing chapter of public housing's history and refines the concept of the fixer. Tenants decried housing authority mismanagement, but they also planned for their buildings’ restoration, countering negative depictions of public housing as unmitigated social disorganization. As officials traded accusations of blame, tenants pursued self-management. Like other fixers, Stella Wright tenant activists--many of them women--emphasized that reliable housing and employment were inextricably linked. They secured an array of allies and for a time enjoyed widespread support and won several critical legal victories. But as public housing programs shifted toward subsidized private rentals and some complexes were demolished with funding from HOPE VI, tenants’ successes were contained within a shrinking corner of the city’s public housing system. Yet the strikers identified problems that fixer organizations would attempt to solve by staking their hopes on the creation of new institutions, rather than the reformation of the old.Less

Fixers for the 1970s? The Stella Wright Rent Strike and the Transformation of Public Housing

Julia Rabig

Published in print: 2016-09-28

Between 1970 and 1974, tenants in the massive Stella Wright Homes led the longest rent strike in the history of U.S. public housing. The quality of Newark’s public housing had eroded alarmingly since its celebrated opening in the 1940s. Poor residents had been funneled into isolated and increasingly decrepit buildings. The tenants’ campaign recaptures a missing chapter of public housing's history and refines the concept of the fixer. Tenants decried housing authority mismanagement, but they also planned for their buildings’ restoration, countering negative depictions of public housing as unmitigated social disorganization. As officials traded accusations of blame, tenants pursued self-management. Like other fixers, Stella Wright tenant activists--many of them women--emphasized that reliable housing and employment were inextricably linked. They secured an array of allies and for a time enjoyed widespread support and won several critical legal victories. But as public housing programs shifted toward subsidized private rentals and some complexes were demolished with funding from HOPE VI, tenants’ successes were contained within a shrinking corner of the city’s public housing system. Yet the strikers identified problems that fixer organizations would attempt to solve by staking their hopes on the creation of new institutions, rather than the reformation of the old.

Residential segregation remains a perennial problem in major metropolitan areas across the United States. Many researchers have focused on the effects of segregation on housing patterns, educational ...
More

Residential segregation remains a perennial problem in major metropolitan areas across the United States. Many researchers have focused on the effects of segregation on housing patterns, educational disparities, and the geographic concentration of poverty. This chapter explores how these and other results of residential segregation affect population health. Using as its backdrop the St. Louis, Missouri, metropolitan area—one of the most segregated metropolitan areas in the nation—this chapter reviews the scientific literature on segregation and health outcomes. It also discusses potential strategies for addressing segregation in this local context and nationally. Much of the local discussion draws on For the Sake of All, a landmark study on the health and well-being of African Americans in St. Louis. An analysis of the cultural, psychological, political, and practical barriers to integration is also presented.Less

The Enduring Significance of Segregation

Jason Q. Purnell

Published in print: 2019-01-03

Residential segregation remains a perennial problem in major metropolitan areas across the United States. Many researchers have focused on the effects of segregation on housing patterns, educational disparities, and the geographic concentration of poverty. This chapter explores how these and other results of residential segregation affect population health. Using as its backdrop the St. Louis, Missouri, metropolitan area—one of the most segregated metropolitan areas in the nation—this chapter reviews the scientific literature on segregation and health outcomes. It also discusses potential strategies for addressing segregation in this local context and nationally. Much of the local discussion draws on For the Sake of All, a landmark study on the health and well-being of African Americans in St. Louis. An analysis of the cultural, psychological, political, and practical barriers to integration is also presented.